porno türk porno rokettube
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 32 of 32

Thread: GONE

  1. #21
    Ext User(Xeno Lith) Guest

    Re: GONE

    On 17/09/13 9:55 PM, felix_unger wrote:
    > On 05-September-2013 5:06 AM, Jeßus wrote:
    >> On Wed, 4 Sep 2013 22:07:58 +1000, Albm&ctd
    >> <alb_mandctdNOWMD@connexus.net.au> wrote:
    >>
    >>> In article <l07640$vq6$1@dont-email.me>, abused@cia.gov says...
    >>>> "jonz" <disco-v8@lotsafuel.com> wrote in message
    >>>> news:l05n6u$nj4$2@dont-email.me...
    >>>>> Bye for now, Off to Un Zud for a week.....
    >>>>> --
    >>>>> ?Usenet is like a herd of performing elephants with diarrhea- massive,
    >>>>> difficult to redirect, awe-inspiring, entertaining, and a source of
    >>>>> mind
    >>>>> boggling amounts of excrement when you least expect it?
    >>>> SHIT!!
    >>>> I'm going over to unzud in about a week, We may meet in the
    >>>> airport.............................
    >>>>
    >>>> Seriously, I am flying over for a weekend (that?s how I roll) to
    >>>> attend a
    >>>> Naval dinner where the guest of honour is going to be Les Munro,
    >>>> pilot of
    >>>> 617 squadron and the last surviving pilot from the Dam Busters mission.
    >>>> I have to admit I am getting a bit excited as the date draws near :-)
    >>>>
    >>> Dam buster, is that a virgin thing?
    >>>
    >>> FFS what do you have to do to get an insult around here?

    >> Buy a Magna.

    >
    > That'll do it! :)
    >

    You only need to post something.... anything!

  2. #22
    Ext User(Noddy) Guest

    Re: GONE

    On 17/09/13 11:33 PM, Toby Ponsenby wrote:

    > I'm thinking that 60 feet might actually have been selected relevant to
    > the thinking of that matter. The speed set up so the 'bombs' had to
    > bounce a certain number of times/for a certain distance, defined by the
    > bomb-aiming set up based on dam dimensions etc.


    The bomb had to reach the dam wall on the surface because anti torpedo
    netting and other devices prevented anything travelling through the
    water beneath the surface to get there.

    So basically they had to emulate skipping stones, and you do that best
    when the angle of attack is relatively low which meant a pretty low
    release altitude. Higher than 60 feet meant that the bomb was likely to
    break up or dive straight in when it hit the surface, and lower meant it
    was likely to bounce back up and take out the plane that just released it.

    The bomb was also rotating backwards at 500rpm to give it a bit of extra
    bounce.

    --
    --
    Regards,
    Noddy.

  3. #23
    Ext User(Jason James) Guest

    Re: GONE

    Atheist Chaplain wrote:>>
    >> Indeed,..they were pretty brave guys,..flying in under the radar at
    >> about 300 feet,..was it ?
    >>
    >> Jason
    >>

    >
    > According to Squadron Leader Munro it was 60 feet !! at 232 miles and
    > hour!!!
    > IN A ****ING LANCASTER BOMBER!!!!!!!!!!
    > Balls the size of watermelons..............



    Aye,..they redefined "having guts",...FMFlo !

    Jason


  4. #24
    Ext User(Atheist Chaplain) Guest

    Re: GONE


    "Noddy" <me@wardengineering.com.au> wrote in message
    news:l19a40$qqa$1@dont-email.me...
    > On 17/09/13 6:46 PM, Atheist Chaplain wrote:
    >
    >> According to Squadron Leader Munro it was 60 feet !! at 232 miles and
    >> hour!!!
    >> IN A ****ING LANCASTER BOMBER!!!!!!!!!!

    >
    > It was certainly difficult, and the difficulty was in the *very* limited
    > time the pilot had in getting the aircraft lined up at the correct
    > altitude to release the bomb. Of the 19 aircraft involved in the various
    > raids, only two managed to hit their targets, cause significant damage and
    > make it back home again.
    >
    >> Balls the size of watermelons..............

    >
    > Not balls. Barrels. The bombs were essentially a large depth charge and
    > were about 3 foot in diameter and 4 and a half foot long. They weren't
    > small.
    >
    >


    OK so how does TESTICLES the size of watermelons sit with you............
    ;-)

    >
    > --
    > --
    > Regards,
    > Noddy.



    --
    Prayer, [noun] - the act or practice of telling God that his infallible plan
    sucks and that you demand changes ASAP


  5. #25
    Ext User(Atheist Chaplain) Guest

    Re: GONE


    "Noddy" <me@wardengineering.com.au> wrote in message
    news:l19h5f$van$1@dont-email.me...
    > On 17/09/13 10:00 PM, felix_unger wrote:
    >
    >> Not only that but the speed was critical also

    >
    > Everything was. The altitude, the speed, and the distance from the dam
    > that the bomb was released. Getting all that together in the very short
    > time they had available to do it was largely the reason why only 2 of the
    > 19 aircraft made any real impact.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > --
    > --
    > Regards,
    > Noddy.


    Part of the story was that some of the pilots actually made several runs so
    that they did get it as close to correct as they could, essential they went
    back to have another go even though they were under enemy fire.

    --
    Prayer, [noun] - the act or practice of telling God that his infallible plan
    sucks and that you demand changes ASAP


  6. #26
    Ext User(Noddy) Guest

    Re: GONE

    On 18/09/13 8:42 PM, Atheist Chaplain wrote:

    > OK so how does TESTICLES the size of watermelons sit with
    > you............ ;-)


    That's a bit better.


    --
    --
    Regards,
    Noddy.

  7. #27
    Ext User(Noddy) Guest

    Re: GONE

    On 18/09/13 8:44 PM, Atheist Chaplain wrote:

    > Part of the story was that some of the pilots actually made several runs
    > so that they did get it as close to correct as they could, essential
    > they went back to have another go even though they were under enemy fire.


    I believe there were a few who had to make a number of attempts before
    releasing their bombs.

    I watched a very interesting Doco on pay telly not all that long ago
    that told the story of 617 Squadron's exploits, and in doing so featured
    a current RAF crew trying to emulate their actions in a fairly accurate
    simulation.

    The modern day crew all had jobs to do like their Lancaster
    counterparts, and clearly the one with the most difficult task was the
    pilot as the amount of time available to get the plane ready for the
    drop was incredibly short. The planes approached the dams by flying low
    along the course of the river leading to the dam wall, ducking and
    weaving over and around undulations until they reached the point where
    the river opened up leading into the dam itself. From there the pilot
    had a few seconds to get the aircraft at the right speed and altitude
    for the bomb aimer to drop the bomb at the right distance from the dam wall.

    Needless to say it was incredibly difficult, and despite some of them
    needing more than a single pass to get themselves "set up" only two
    managed to hit the targets successfully and cause a large breach. One of
    which was Flight Lieutenant Les Knight DSO of the Royal Australian Air
    Force.






    --
    --
    Regards,
    Noddy.

  8. #28
    Ext User(Toby Ponsenby) Guest

    Re: GONE

    On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 20:56:50 +1000, Noddy blathered:

    > On 18/09/13 8:42 PM, Atheist Chaplain wrote:
    >
    >> OK so how does TESTICLES the size of watermelons sit with
    >> you............ ;-)

    >
    > That's a bit better.


    Enter Baggy Bletchley...

    --
    Toby

  9. #29
    Ext User(John McKenzie) Guest

    Re: GONE

    Noddy wrote:
    >
    > On 18/09/13 8:44 PM, Atheist Chaplain wrote:
    >
    > > Part of the story was that some of the pilots actually made several runs
    > > so that they did get it as close to correct as they could, essential
    > > they went back to have another go even though they were under enemy fire.

    >
    > I believe there were a few who had to make a number of attempts before
    > releasing their bombs.
    >
    > I watched a very interesting Doco on pay telly not all that long ago
    > that told the story of 617 Squadron's exploits, and in doing so featured
    > a current RAF crew trying to emulate their actions in a fairly accurate
    > simulation.
    >
    > The modern day crew all had jobs to do like their Lancaster
    > counterparts, and clearly the one with the most difficult task was the
    > pilot as the amount of time available to get the plane ready for the
    > drop was incredibly short. The planes approached the dams by flying low
    > along the course of the river leading to the dam wall, ducking and
    > weaving over and around undulations until they reached the point where
    > the river opened up leading into the dam itself. From there the pilot
    > had a few seconds to get the aircraft at the right speed and altitude
    > for the bomb aimer to drop the bomb at the right distance from the dam wall.
    >
    > Needless to say it was incredibly difficult, and despite some of them
    > needing more than a single pass to get themselves "set up" only two
    > managed to hit the targets successfully and cause a large breach. One of
    > which was Flight Lieutenant Les Knight DSO of the Royal Australian Air
    > Force.


    Is peter jackson still doing a remake of 'the dambusters'? THe original,
    despite what would by modern standards be considered 'dodgy' special
    effects, is a ****ing classic. I reckon if a remake is done, it'll have
    one inaccuracy deliberately put in, or they'll avoid it altogether. That
    being the 'code word' they send to indicate mission accomplished.
    Apparently in the film when shown in the US, they changed the dog's name
    to 'trigger' and I think similarly they changed the code word to trigger
    as well.

    I have to say, some of the stuff blokes did in ww2 (ww1 was probably far
    more psychologically brutal for the average soldier on balance) and how
    technology was dragged kicking and screaming forward at an incredible
    pace, it's pretty bloody awe inspiring.

    Speaking of bombing runs, have you seen the doco about the RAF doing a
    bombing run prior to main operations in the falklands? using vulcan
    bombers, and a very complicated in flight refuel strategy. In practice
    their fuel usage exceeded their ability to refuel and they decided to
    proceed anyway, without certainty they'd make it home, and then teh
    bombing run itself - iirc it was literally the very last of the bombs
    dropped that actually hit (and took out) the target - iirc it was an
    airfield/runway. I saw it some years back, was bloody amazing to say the
    least. There's also a doco on 'goose green' (I think it was called) how
    british soldiers managed to take prisoner of enemy forces that
    outnumbered them ridiculously (not quite '300' but pretty overwhelming
    odds). I guess it was a bit of help, the fact being most of the
    argentinian soldiers didn't want to bloodywell be there in the first
    place.

    and lastly - don't ya just love aus.cars. Other usenet groups go off on
    tangents, but we turn it into an art form.

    --
    John McKenzie

    tosspam@aol.com abuse@yahoo.com abuse@hotmail.com abuse@earthlink.com
    vice.president@whitehouse.gov president@whitehouse.gov root@mailloop.com
    sweep.day@accc.gov.au abuse@iprimus.com.au uce@ftc.gov $LOGIN@localhost
    $USER@$HOST | science flies people to the moon | abuse@fbi.gov
    abuse@aol.com
    admin@loopback | religion flies people into buildings |
    $LOGNAME@localhost
    -h1024@localhost abuse@msn.com abuse@federalpolice.gov.au abuse@cia.gov
    fraudinfo@psinet.com abuse@asio.gov.au $USER@localhost abuse@sprint.com

  10. #30
    Ext User(Paul Saccani) Guest

    Re: GONE

    On Tue, 17 Sep 2013 22:15:48 +1000, Noddy <me@wardengineering.com.au>
    wrote:

    >On 17/09/13 10:00 PM, felix_unger wrote:
    >
    >> Not only that but the speed was critical also

    >
    >Everything was. The altitude, the speed, and the distance from the dam
    >that the bomb was released. Getting all that together in the very short
    >time they had available to do it was largely the reason why only 2 of
    >the 19 aircraft made any real impact.


    Four out of four targets hit, two out of four destroyed in one raid is
    actually pretty good for the times. Their impact was vastly
    disproportionate to their numbers.
    --
    Cheers,
    Paul Saccani
    Perth, Western Australia.

  11. #31
    Ext User(Paul Saccani) Guest

    Re: GONE

    On Tue, 17 Sep 2013 20:15:33 +1000, Noddy <me@wardengineering.com.au>
    wrote:

    >On 17/09/13 6:46 PM, Atheist Chaplain wrote:
    >
    >> According to Squadron Leader Munro it was 60 feet !! at 232 miles and
    >> hour!!!
    >> IN A LANCASTER BOMBER!!!!!!!!!!

    >
    >It was certainly difficult, and the difficulty was in the *very* limited
    >time the pilot had in getting the aircraft lined up at the correct
    >altitude to release the bomb. Of the 19 aircraft involved in the various
    >raids, only two managed to hit their targets, cause significant damage
    >and make it back home again.


    Better odds than most raids - at least with regard to causing
    significant damage to the target. Poor with regard to crew survival,
    however, though, shockingly, there were a number of raids with similar
    numbers involved, where no one returned.
    --
    Cheers,
    Paul Saccani
    Perth, Western Australia.

  12. #32

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    843
    I was walking down the street in Auckland once and saw a kiwi bloke rooting a sheep. I said "mate, in Australia we shear those things", to which he replied in his stupid accent "I'm not shearing this with anyone".

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •